Universität zu Köln

Sattler, Sebastian ORCID: 0000-0002-6491-0754, Jacobs, Edward ORCID: 0000-0002-2622-7233, Singh, Ilina ORCID: 0000-0003-4497-3587, Whetham, David ORCID: 0000-0001-8269-0006, Bard, Imre, Moreno, Jonathan, Galeazzi, Gian and Allansdottir, Agnes ORCID: 0000-0003-0961-2380 (2022). Neuroenhancements in the Military: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study on Attitudes of Staff Officers to Ethics and Rules. Neuroethics, 15 (1). NEW YORK: SPRINGER. ISSN 1874-5504

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Utilising science and technology to maximize human performance is often an essential feature of military activity. This can often be focused on mission success rather than just the welfare of the individuals involved. This tension has the potential to threaten the autonomy of soldiers and military physicians around the taking or administering of enhancement neurotechnologies (e.g., pills, neural implants, and neuroprostheses). The Hybrid Framework was proposed by academic researchers working in the U.S. context and comprises rules for military neuroenhancement (e.g., ensuring transparency and maintaining dignity of the warfighter). Integrating traditional bioethical perspectives with the unique requirements of the military environment, it has been referenced by military/government agencies tasked with writing official ethical frameworks. Our two-part investigation explored the ethical dimensions of military neuroenhancements with military officers - those most likely to be making decisions in this area in the future. In three workshops, structured around the Hybrid Framework, we explored what they thought about the ethical issues of enhancement neurotechnologies. From these findings, we conducted a survey (N = 332) to probe the extent of rule endorsement. Results show high levels of endorsement for a warfighter's decision-making autonomy, but lower support for the view that enhanced warfighters would pose a danger to society after service. By examining the endorsement of concrete decision-making guidelines, we provide an overview of how military officers might, in practice, resolve tensions between competing values or higher-level principles. Our results suggest that the military context demands a recontextualisation of the relationship between military and civilian ethics.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID ORCID Put Code Sattler, Sebastian UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-0754 UNSPECIFIED Jacobs, Edward UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0002-2622-7233 UNSPECIFIED Singh, Ilina UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0003-4497-3587 UNSPECIFIED Whetham, David UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0001-8269-0006 UNSPECIFIED Bard, Imre UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Moreno, Jonathan UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Galeazzi, Gian UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Allansdottir, Agnes UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0003-0961-2380 UNSPECIFIED
URN:	urn:nbn:de:hbz:38-691278
DOI:	10.1007/s12152-022-09490-2
Journal or Publication Title:	Neuroethics
Volume:	15
Number:	1
Date:	2022
Publisher:	SPRINGER
Place of Publication:	NEW YORK
ISSN:	1874-5504
Language:	English
Faculty:	Unspecified
Divisions:	Unspecified
Subjects:	no entry
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Keywords Language COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT Multiple languages Ethics; Medical Ethics; Social Sciences, Biomedical Multiple languages
URI:	http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/id/eprint/69127